Overshot Technology

[Dalton Knapper]

In the images below, you will see an example of cueball-based overshot technology. The Keokuk mateial used has been heat treated, however the rock remains very fryable and hard and prone to thin flakes. To create this supurb example of cueball-based overshot technology, a center ridge was selected, the platform isolated and direct percussion was applied to the area - a specific point actually. The angle was acute so that the force would spread along the ridge and carry to the other side. If you can imagine the cueball as a chunk of mammoth ivory, and a tine-based pressure flaker used to isolate the platrorm following the ridge principal, you can imagine how it is done. This process is repeatable given the specific setup and conditions necessary to reproduce the overshot effect. I aplogize for the faint hazing - the lens was not clean. In the future, I hope to produce a video. Here are the images:

[AncientTech]

Thanks for sharing this.  So, out of curiosity, can you employ this technology from inside indentations, where the ball would not be able to make contact, due to size constraints?

If it does not work inside indentations, then I would have to guess that paleo people were not using Q-balls - or using anything similar - while flaking from inside indentations, located in both basal and lateral areas.

[Zuma]

Not sure I understand.
Do you shoot the cue ball at the preform's
platform with a chalked que?
Zuma

[AncientTech]

Double thanks.

If this process does not work inside indentation, and it can be shown that prehistoric knappers worked from inside indentations, near the centerline, then this experiment demonstrates that larger spherical percussors were probably not used to strike flakes off of smaller recessed platforms, located in indented areas.

So, what also looks like a "sphere"?  A "semi-sphere" (half a globe").  And, what sort of flintknapping tool exhibits semi-spherical morphology?  Quite frequently, modern flintknapping batons, that were devised in England during the 1930's, and then were later popularized by Bordes, and Crabtree, via worldwide television.  Almost invariably, the ends of such modern flaking tools have a semi-spherical shape - unless you happen to get a flat spot, and then you have to grind it - which is a whole 'nother story.

Seeing that the ends of modern flintknapping batons are semi-spherical, this demonstration brings to mind the possibility that maybe were not used to flake out of recesses, at all. 

[Dalton Knapper]

Ancient Tech - I assume your question is can I flute a point with an object of a larger diameter curve than will fit inside the smaller diameter curve of the base of a point prepared for fluting. I'd say no. There should howver be absolutely NO assumption that any archaic society used any percussion device even remotely shaped like a cue ball. This is just something I have done for three reasons. 1) to be humorous. 2) to see if I could do it 3) to get a rough idea if a dense and rather short ivory or antler like material could be effectively used, but I'll say right here that it is mere conjecture that a modern pool ball is anything similar to ivory, however I believe it to be very similar to a dense antler (based on experimentstion). So no you can't fit it inside the base of any typical points preped and ready for fluting, but it is proven to do good edge work.

However, we do have this: http://www.lithiccastinglab.com/gallery-pages/2010aprilivorybilletblackwaterpage1.htm. Be sure and note Dothager's moose antler replicas. I think these would work rather nicely doing all basic percussion work. There is no reason we should expect (or not expect) that the same tool used for edge flake removal was the tool used for fluting on Clovis, Folsom or other fluted points. Could have been another tool. I think we can however assume that any tool kit a Paleo Indian had that consisted of semi-permanent tools would be few and portable. Perhaps a tine punch, similar to the one you have often displayed, may have been used for fluting. However you have never revealed it's exact use. You have also never denied that your tine was used as a punch.

Zuma - Those are the easy shots - just try banking one!

I'll do more experiments. I wold like now to aquire a very short, dense antler billet (likely moose) as Ivory is out of the question. I don't want to conttribute to any ivory bearing animal's potential death, even old ivory, but you I may get lucky and see something for sale one day. Also regarding longer billets, in genera,l made of antler, if these were a common knapping tool, where are all of them in the archeologicla record? We certainly see some, but I think by and large hammerstones in skilled hands can do a great job - Just look what Marty Reuter can do with one. Maybe one day we will know more about what Paleo Indians used.

[AncientTech]

Thanks for the clarification, Dalton Knapper.

As a general experiment, it is actually impressive.

Regarding the use of a cue ball, I believe that the old time cue balls were made of ivory, while the newer balls might be synthetic. 

That being said, it might be possible to track down an old ivory pool ball, and use it directly as an ivory flaker, or have it machined into a cylinder.

I am not sure how the density of ivory compares to the density of antler.  Obviously, in direct percussion, really light antler can have its drawbacks.

Regarding the Clovis ivory object, it could be a tool used in direct percussion.  It also conforms to the shape of tools which were historically known to have been used to create blanks, via indirect percussion, for subsequent point production.  I believe that Redding's account, of Consulu, covers a punch with a square cut end used to detach an obsidian blade/blank then used to make an arrowhead.  The purpose of a square edge - in blade/blank creation - appears to be to catch the platform, during impact.  Again, I would not dismiss the idea of direct percussion, either.  Without further data on similar Clovis cylinders - if more can be found - it will be hard to tell.

Regarding billet-like objects and the American archaeological record, no one has ever demonstrated that such tools were not used as "pitching tools".  I believe that Ray describes pitching tools as being about six inches in length, and one inch in diameter.  He actually sent one to the National Museum, while stationed with the Hupa, during the 1880's.  Mason follows, with similar information, along with others.  I have out of print information, from a California gemologist who wrote during the 1930's, who knew of the native Californian obsidian workers.  Either he describes the "pitching tools", or their use, or both. 

Regarding the use of hammerstones, I think it is worth comparing the evidence related to hammerstone use, along with the evidence relating to hard hammer bi-polar technology.  The traits of both are different.  Distinguishing the attributes of the two, as seen in archaeological contexts, could make it easier to get a clearer idea as to how each technology(s) was employed.  With regard to hammerstone use, there were probably entire sets of technologies.  I probably use around a half a dozen technologies, always on raw stone.           
 

[Zuma]

Here is a good fluting billet. I am not sure if it is white tail or mulie.
Found it as a shed in ND.
It works just fine for free hand flutes.
 Clovis points nipples weren't in a concavity to start.
They were prominent with a square base especially in western types.
A slight  concavity is developed  preping for a second nipple.
Most of the concavity is done by pressure, cleaning up the haft
area when the fluting is done and the base is very thin.
Zuma

[AncientTech]

Here is a good fluting billet. I am not sure if it is white tail or mulie.
Found it as a shed in ND.
It works just fine for free hand flutes.
 Clovis points nipples weren't in a concavity to start.
They were prominent with a square base especially in western types.
A slight  concavity is developed  preping for a second nipple.
Most of the concavity is done by pressure, cleaning up the haft
area when the fluting is done and the base is very thin.
Zuma

Thanks for posting that, Zuma.  That is an excellent example of a modern flintknapping "baton", as devised during the 1930's, in England. 

Also, prior to that, there was some academic speculation, in Europe, that the "baton de commandement" could have been used to flake chert.  That probably would have been around 1900, about 30 years before the first baton flaking experiments were carried out, at Pitts River Museum, by Professor Alfred S. Barnes.  As far as I know, none of the "baton de commandements" have ever been shown to show signs of use wear, consistent with the flaking of flint.  But, don't quote me on that.  I could be wrong.  If anyone can show a "baton de commandement", showing some sort of flintknapping use wear, then please post it.

In order to demonstrate that an item such as a flaker is a culturally predictable trait, one must document the entire lifespan of the said flaker, as known from archaeological contexts.  For example, from archaeological contexts, one would need to show the fabrication of the flakers, use of the flakers, refurbishment of the flakers, wear of the flakers, and the eventual discarding of the flakers, once they have been fully expended.  Then, with this information, it becomes possible to show cultural predictability, which makes for a good case that the alleged tool was used for a specific purpose, and in a particular culture. 

So, in the case of a flaker like the one you are showing, it is a rather simple matter.  From archaeological contexts, one must show how ancient people fabricated the billet, used the billet, refurbished the billet, and eventually discarded the billet.  Once all of this has been established, then you will be able to predict where billets should be found - such as in the graves of deceased flintknappers.  If you can peg all of this to a single culture, then you can start looking to find all of this in a second culture, and a third culture, and so on.

Also, since there is significant evidence that Native American knappers used similar billet-like tools, but in different flaking processes, one must be able to fully differentiate such a tool, from the modern "antler billet', as was invented in England, during the 1930's.  In other words, one would need full criteria on the "pitching tools" known to Native American cultures, far and wide, in order to ascertain that a billet-like tool was not actually a pitching tool.  And, this requires more advanced knowledge.

Anyway, if anyone thinks that he can demonstrate the full lifestyle of "antler billets" in prehistoric contexts, then please post the information, and tie it to a culture.  Show how the antler flintknapping baton is a culturally predictable trait.           

[JoJoDapyro]

How many cultures made bone or antler beads? In a culture where nothing was wasted it is hard to believe that you would assume that once a chunk of bone or antler wasn't useful for one thing, that it wasn't repurposed as something else. Kind of a thought I've had on why son many "bird points" are found. An arrowhead is made, each time it is resharpened it progressively gets smaller and smaller. Until it is too small to be of much use anymore. Then it is discarded. Just a thought from an overactive brain.

[turbo]

Concerning the short Blackwater billet, I always felt it could have been used like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZdWda99zrI
I have a couple short billets like his in my kit. As you can see in the video he uses it much like a hammerstone, it's a very natural transition.

Indirect was surely used. Marty Reuter has experimented a lot w/ indirect. His shaft/composite punch is basically a billet on a stick and works well. He has also used rocker style punches. I'm about to try out his water buffalo punch as well.

While I don't disagree w/ (some) of 'ancient tech's thoughts on billets, I feel that we can't rule them out either. Use wear and other analysis should help determine, to some degree, their intended use(s). While I see your point on proving billet use through their 'lifespan', this would be difficult to prove for bone/antler artifacts. Bone doesn't survive as well, especially since Paleo times. Can you prove this w/ your mystery tool?